Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-17-2007, 10:25 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 423
Which one lens would you keep?

Hi all,

I am currently consolidating my lens line-up (read: need money for another LBA) and need some help in deciding which lens I should keep, between FA20-35/4 and DA16-45/4.

Initially I was thinking of keeping the FA20-35, selling the DA16-45 and get the DA12-24 so less overlap between focal length. But then I thought if I keep DA16-45, sell FA20-35 and instead of getting DA12-24, I can get DA14/2.8 which is faster, better IQ, and wide enough for me.

Another reason I was originally thinking of selling DA16-45 was that I could use FA20-35/4 on my film body but then I have only shot film about twice in the last 6 months! Plus the possibility of getting K10D this year, I probably won't shoot much film after that.

So what do you think? Should I keep the FA20-35 or the DA16-45?

Thanks
Kenny

03-17-2007, 11:12 PM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,755
I'd keep the FA if I were you- it's smaller than the DA and a very handy lens on a film body. Plus, if you ever change your mind, you'll always be able to pick the DA up again. The DA is a good walk-around lens, but there are better alternatives out there (FA, FA*, DA*)

Now, it is true that the 20-35mm focal length isn't that great on digital (you'll have to swich lenses often), but I've managed to stick to FA lenses on all my longer trips, and the photos were quite stunning in terms of quality.

There's not much difference in IQ between the 14mm and 12-24mm, BTW- both are great lenses.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

03-17-2007, 11:15 PM   #3
Site Supporter
jamesk8752's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Suburban Detroit, MI, USA
Posts: 226
Tough call, Kenny (this from a collector who never sells his lenses!), but if you really want to consolidate I think that keeping the DA16-45 and getting rid of the FA20-35 makes the most sense, especially as you don't use wide angle a lot. The DA16-45 is really a great all-purpose lens and givs you some reach at the long end that you will probably use more often than you would the ultrawide range below 16mm. The FA20-35 will bring a decent price if it's in good condition, as it is no longer being made and is thus a rarity.
03-17-2007, 11:17 PM   #4
Site Supporter
jamesk8752's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Suburban Detroit, MI, USA
Posts: 226
LOL! Looks like Mo and i disagree, but I did say that IMO it is a tough call.

03-18-2007, 04:18 AM   #5
Veteran Member
joele's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,309
You know what I did Kenny? I sold the 16-45 ;-)

As you said if your going to get the 12-24 I would also say sell the 16-45.. And although I generally prefer primes, I think I would get the 12-24 over the 14mm
03-18-2007, 05:04 AM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 423
Original Poster
Thanks for all the replies so far.

Mo: That's what I was thinking too but given that I seldom shoot film nowaday, the argument that I can use it only film bodies doesn't really hold for me. However I do find that FA20-35 is an excellent focal length on the digital for street photography.

Jim: That's the option I am kind of leaning for at this stage. I find that when I use zoom lenses, I have a more utilitarian approach, ie as long as the IQ isn't too bad (ie no super zoom), I use whatever works. DA16-45 is better than FA20-35 in this regard (better range and similar IQ). I am actually also contempleting about selling both FA20-35 and DA16-45 and get Simga 17-70 + a moderate telephoto prime (see my reply to Joele below).

Joele: yes, I noticed that you sold your 16-45 too! ;-) I am not too sure if I will be getting an wide-angle lens next yet. Currently I have got a gap between FA50/1.4 and FA135/2.8 in my AF lenses line-up (got that range covered with K85/1.8 and M100/2.8 in my MF lenses line-up). So I might be getting either FA77, DA70 or DFA100.

By the way, does anyone know what's the going price for FA20-35 currently?

Thanks!

Kenny
03-18-2007, 11:52 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 441
I had both the DA 16-45 and the FA 20-35. There is no doubt in my mind that the 16-45 is a superior lens. It's wider on the wide end, longer on the long end, sharper from f4 until f8, has less barrel distortion at 20mm, and has less CA. The only advantages of the FA 20-35 are smaller size, slightly less weight, and compatibility with film cameras. I sold the FA 20-35 and bought a Pentax M 20mm f4 for use with my LX film camera. The little M 20mm outperforms the FA 20-35 and is a better match for my LX.

QuoteOriginally posted by kjao Quote
Thanks for all the replies so far.

By the way, does anyone know what's the going price for FA20-35 currently?
I sold mine for $350. I bought it new and had it for about 8 months.
03-18-2007, 02:44 PM   #8
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 66
Sell

Sell both lenses and buy the 12-24. I am in love with this lens. IQ is awesome.

03-19-2007, 03:50 AM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 423
Original Poster
Hi Gary

It is great to hear opinion from someone who has also owned both lenses. I agree with you about DA16-45 having greater range and less barrel distortion at 20mm but I must say that I don't find IQ that much different between the two. DA16-45 does have some barrel distortion at 16mm too.

I have been trying to hunt down a FA20/2.8 but no luck so far =(

Thanks for the price. That gives me some idea how much I will need to come with for my next LBA =)

cheers
Kenny


QuoteOriginally posted by GaryML Quote
I had both the DA 16-45 and the FA 20-35. There is no doubt in my mind that the 16-45 is a superior lens. It's wider on the wide end, longer on the long end, sharper from f4 until f8, has less barrel distortion at 20mm, and has less CA. The only advantages of the FA 20-35 are smaller size, slightly less weight, and compatibility with film cameras. I sold the FA 20-35 and bought a Pentax M 20mm f4 for use with my LX film camera. The little M 20mm outperforms the FA 20-35 and is a better match for my LX.



I sold mine for $350. I bought it new and had it for about 8 months.
03-19-2007, 04:07 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 423
Original Poster
Hi Singinman

That idea has come across my mind too but unfortunately it is a little too expensive for me.

Looks like I will be keeping DA16-45 and sell FA20-35. Anyone interested in doing a swap for DFA100? =)

cheers
Kenny

QuoteOriginally posted by Singinman Quote
Sell both lenses and buy the 12-24. I am in love with this lens. IQ is awesome.
03-19-2007, 04:17 AM   #11
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
Kenny, why not just go for Da* 16-50 anyway selling Da 16-45.

I would keep Fa as it is no longer in production. Talking business.

DFA 100 is a hell of a good lens. It is sharp wide open with thin DOF. I saw photography monthly rating this lens inferior to other brands last year. What I do find is that DFA macro has thinner DOF than other brands. No testing. Just my gut feelings since I owned all the canon 50 100 180L macro plus sigma 150 and 105 macro as well. DFA 100 macro is certainly more contrasty, equally sharp. It is soooooo small

Sell Da 16-45 since it will become sort of obsolete once Da* comes out
03-19-2007, 02:58 PM   #12
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
QuoteOriginally posted by kjao Quote
Hi all,

I am currently consolidating my lens line-up (read: need money for another LBA) and need some help in deciding which lens I should keep, between FA20-35/4 and DA16-45/4.

Initially I was thinking of keeping the FA20-35, selling the DA16-45 and get the DA12-24 so less overlap between focal length. But then I thought if I keep DA16-45, sell FA20-35 and instead of getting DA12-24, I can get DA14/2.8 which is faster, better IQ, and wide enough for me.

Another reason I was originally thinking of selling DA16-45 was that I could use FA20-35/4 on my film body but then I have only shot film about twice in the last 6 months! Plus the possibility of getting K10D this year, I probably won't shoot much film after that.

So what do you think? Should I keep the FA20-35 or the DA16-45?

Thanks
Kenny
I would get rid of the 20-35 because when shooting with digital format the 16 mm is almost as wide as 20 mm on a film format, and as a result you don't give away that much, plus the 45 mm longer focal length is equivelent to about 70 mm on film, making this a great single lense to travel with, i.e. reasonably wide for sightseeing, and moderatley longer than "normal" for portraits, people etc.

If you had to take ONLY ONE lense on a trip, out of what you have, this would be it!
03-19-2007, 04:06 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 423
Original Poster
Hi roentarre

Nice idea but I will probably have trouble justifying the cost, not to mention I will probably have to live on bread/instant noodle for the next couple of months if I do that! =)

Talking about business, which one would fetch me more money? Gary sold his FA20-35 for $350. I don't think a 2nd-hand DA16-45 would sell for that much, maybe $250?

I don't think 16-45/4 would be obsolete by the DA*, I think they are targeted at different market. Personally I prefer to have light and "good/fast enough" zooms and complement them with fast primes. I have seen my friend's Canon L lenses and I just don't see myself carry them around!

cheers
Kenny
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
da12-24, da16-45, fa20-35, film, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:50 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top